Results 61 - 80 of 517
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Beja Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224854 | ||
Doc, I did notice the emphasis on those "knowing" words. I wonder what significance, if any, there is in his choices of which he used at various times. However, I've not had time to study the book in the greek. I believe I have diagrammed 2 Peter 1:1-10 before but its been too long. This question came up just in my own devotional time rather than any in depth study. I did as a result preach on the passage drawing out how it flows from what God has already done for us and then moves into what we are to pursue. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
62 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224865 | ||
Doc, That's what has always kept me from really nailing this down in my mind. The notion of gaining one before the other doesn't really work. However, if we resist the notion of perfection in one before the other it helps some. I could see it in the sense of to your faith add virture (perhaps the desire to do right), then you build upon that foundation with knowledge (biblical definitions of right), then self control (The discipline to act on that right knowledge and desire), then perseverance (doing this over the long run. Then I almost see the next step as a cap or culmination of all the previous. The end result of having all four of those being godliness. I intend to do a word study on that greek word when I get a chance to see if that could work or if by godliness the notion is something that doesn't fit that thinking. But if godliness was meant to be a high point in this list, before moving on to the two that orient around love that would fit well with verse 3 which gives godliness as one of the two things God has provided everything necessary for. Just some thoughts. I certainly haven't figured it out. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
63 | The error addressed in 2 Peter | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224866 | ||
I did a small search on that "godliness." My theory doesn't really fit because its meaning is more along the lines of a passion and devotion to the things of God. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
64 | Did God the Father create Jesus | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226007 | ||
Makarios, Very fitting to answer from a quote. I would love to even see an ancient quote answering this objection; I know there must be several. The reason it is so fitting is that not only does it answer the question, but it also serves to remind us that such heretical objections are nothing new. They have been raised before, and they will be raised again. Praise God that we have not only godly men in the present to answer such objections, but that He has gifted us throughout the history of the church with a long lineage of men who have risen up to rebuke challenges to the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
65 | will suiside send you to hell | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226157 | ||
jlhetrik, I hope EdB will forgive me if I'm misrepresenting his side of the arguement, but let me chime in and try to clarify what I think is being said. Scripture nowhere clearly states that suicides go to hell. What it does teach is that a saved individual will partake of an ongoing sanctification that leads them to greater and greater Christ likeness, despite the fact that we will never be sinless in this life. Now suicide is not simply struggling with a particular sin, but instead it is a radical and finally unresolvable departure from that pattern. Thus, it may cause us to question salvation in the same way we would question the salvation of a professing Christian that is completely overcome in sin and dies with no fruits or evidence of repentence. So the arguement is not one of perfectionism, it is simply having a hard time placing suicide with scriptures affirmation of the ongoing sanctification of believers. I too, for this very reason, struggle to believe a suicide is a saved individual even though I can not rule out the possibility for certain. It simply seems that one of the marks of saving faith is a perseverance which is quite contrary to suicide. May God grant that I am wrong! In Christ, Beja |
||||||
66 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226245 | ||
Glenda, I reply to Ed's post but really this is meant for the original poster. I do so because I want to comment on Ed's point but I'm not really wanting to get into a debate on it. I simply would like the original poster to know that the teaching that Christ went to a subsection of Hades known as paradise in order to preach the gospel to those that are dead is certainly not an undisputed teaching of scripture. Incase it isn't obvious, I personally think its rooted in completely missunderstanding a few passages. If any wish to discuss the passages I am happy to, but for the moment I merely wish to make readers aware that the passages ought to be studied themselves so they can come to their own conclusions. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
67 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226248 | ||
EdB, I find no scripture whatsoever saying that Christ went to Hades. Second, I find no passage in SCRIPTURE that teaches a two fold division of hell where once good dead people lived. Second, I find no passage in scripture whatsoever that teaches some great jail break from one of those sections of hell after individuals are already there. I find no passage in scripture that teaches dead people were later preached the gospel so that they could be saved. In contrast, I see scripture affirm that the old testament saints saw the promises of Christ from afar and believed. So in short, I question the entire line of thought from start to finish. You ask me to accept your entire elaborate notion of all these things and then once granting all of that, you then say how do I argue against a minor point? The problem is that I see no reason anywhere to think that any of it is more than our own imagination. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
68 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226250 | ||
EdB, Its going to be hard to come to any real communication between us that is anything but us repeating our party lines unless we are willing to stop and evaluate points one at time and slowly. Therefore to that end, if you really want to analyze this with me, I will take the only passage of scripture you quoted and I will show you why I think it is utterly absurd to interpret it as if scripture is sugesting there is a location known as 'Abraham's Bosom.' Now, lets see Luke 16, what does it actually say? Luk 16:23 "In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and *saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom." Now, it says he looked up and saw what? Abraham. He saw the person. Not a place called Abraham's bosom...he saw the person Abraham! If you have any doubts to this, read the rest of the passage and understand that he was speaking with whom? Abraham! So he saw the person, and he saw Lazarus in his bosom, in other words held to his side. The picture here is that he saw abraham holding and comforting Lazarus. So how on earth can you tell me that from this statement I must accept that this passage is teaching a place under the earth that is named Abraham's bosom, which was a temprory holding cell for righteous people until Christ come emptied them from the place called Abraham's bosom? I ask anybody with common sense to tell me this isn't a huge case of reading your pre-existing thoughts into the text. Indeed, this is your only passage! Everything else you bring is speculation by uninspired authors! If you want any address to the apostles creed, I refer you to John Calvin's address to itin the institutes of the Christian religion. So now, if you wish, debate my interpretation of Luke, or if you'd rather, put forward some other evidence for this elaborate view. But please, lets bring your evidence forward one piece at a time so that we might inspect the quality of the things you say. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
69 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226257 | ||
EdB, You state: "I guess if you are going to summarily discount the Talmud and Jewish oral tradition that agrees with the description of Hades found in Luke 16" Response: I most certainly am going to dismiss it, and I feel you ought to give answer to my exegesis of Luke 16 before you just go on acting as if there is a parallel. You said: "...any further discussion on the subject is pointless." Response: Have you no scripture whatsoever then for these things you are teaching to young Christians? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
70 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226266 | ||
EdB, I'm tempted to reply to several things you said in your last post. You always seem to assert your view all over again in the posts where you intend to move on. However, as per your wishes I will let it drop with only one exception that I feel I must correct. You said, "it is obvious to all that neither of us are going to change the others mind." However, I insist that whether it be this day or sometime down the road, I stand more than ready to recant and accept the teaching should you be able to show me that it has sound basis in the word of God. May God bless you as well. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
71 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226288 | ||
EdB, You keep saying that in luke 16 "Jesus clearly painted a word picture of Hades." May I ask what specifically in that passage you would point to in order to prove that Jesus is speaking of two sections of Hell as oppossed to one person in Hell and another person in heaven being comforted by Abraham? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
72 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226289 | ||
Thread, I can't help but to think about my own question, and what possible answers there might be in the passage. First I've shown clearly that the passages displays Abraham himself as being there. But if I recall at some point it was asked, how can one be IN another person's bosom? As if that would show that clearly a location must be meant by Abraham's bosom and not Lazarath being held to Abraham, the person's, side. Let's see if this holds up to scripture. Look with me at John 13:23 Here it is in the NASB Joh 13:23 There was reclining on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. Here again in young's literal Joh 13:23 And there was one of his disciples reclining (at meat) in the bosom of Jesus, whom Jesus was loving; I post YLT, because the NASB here has cleaned itup some for english. In the Greek both Luke16:23 and John 13:23 use the greek preposition en. It quite literally says that as they reclined there, John was "in" Jesus' bosom. However, quite clearly it meant laying upon his bosom, hence the NASB making it more understandable. So clearly "in his bosom" can very comfortably mean being held at Abraham's side. If this is not enough see these verses. Gen 16:5, Exo 4:6, Num 11:2, Ruth 4:16, 2 Sam 12:18, 1 Kin 1:2, 1 King 3:20, 1 King 17:19, Prov 6:27, Isa 40:11, Isa 49:22, Micah 7:5, Luke 6:38, John 1:18. I hope this shows conclusively that the word "in" is no reason to interpret Abraham's bosom as anything other than the man's bosom. However, lets see what Gill has to say. I dare say he's a man who knows Jewish thought quite well. Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state: of Abraham's happy state they had no doubt; and when they spake of the happiness of another's, they sometimes signified it by going to Abraham. I know it might offend EdB that I continue the discussion after we called it off. Yet I feel that continuing to speak as if it is a given that luke is saying this deserves to be challenged, and that he should exegetically defend his interpretation of the passage before continuing to present it as a given. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
73 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226291 | ||
EdB, So nothing whatsoever in the actual passage that you can point to. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
74 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226294 | ||
EdB, You said: "First you believe Jesus wasn't the only way into heaven that there was another way." It was very ungracious of you to put words such as these into my mouth. You have your wish, I'll comment on this thread no further. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
75 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226297 | ||
EdB, How about you follow the words "you said" with an actual quote or please just don't do it with reference to me if you can't. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
76 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226301 | ||
EdB, I did what I ought to have done much sooner and I stepped away from the forum for some prayer. All is forgiven. However, I just ask that you will take care. Two posts in a row you stated that "I said" some things that are absolutely heretical. Namely that Abraham was saved apart from the cross of Christ and that there is some other way to salvation other than Christ. Both of these things I reject and if you look through my posts you will see that I never said either of them. Now I may have said some things which you believe start a train of thought that culminates in them, but never did I say any such thing. And I say now, I do not believe them nor do I believe my theology necessitates such views. Anyways, it is forgiven and from this point on with God's grace to help me no thought will be given to it again. Though I felt I should state it here so that you'd know what my feelings were offended over and more importantly so that any readers would know that I do not dare believe or teach such things. For my part I'm sorry as well, and God has certainly shown me that there are things I have done in the posts to help steer this thread to its current lack of edification for readers. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
77 | where is Christ battling Satan in HELL | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226326 | ||
EdB, I agree with you that what you described is a horrible heresy, and I'm glad I've seen no sign of it in my church. However, I do believe that Christ was truely held up to Old Testament believers, though only in types and shadows. Now that Christ has come, the types and shadows pointing to him are done away with. This would be a lengthy bible study indeed, but I point you to Colossians. Col 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. It says that these things were a shadow of what was to come, and what was to come was Christ. So I believe we err should we say that the Old Testament was not truely pointing towards Christ. However, we also stray into error if we suggest they continue their work of displaying Christ after he has come. So I do believe that believers pre-newtestament had a faith in the Messiah, and I believe it was on this basis they were justified before God. How could we argue that they were not justified prior to the incarnation when God clearly names Abraham righteous because he believed in Genesis 15? And in Romans 4, Paul clearly portrays this declaration of righteousness as his justification, even the forgiveness of his sins. Now again, I deny wholely that his justification before God was apart from Christ and his work on the cross. For Jesus himself said that Abraham saw his day. Joh 8:56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." I do not mean to suggest that Abraham knew everything we do, things such as Christ's occupation as a carpenter, or even that he would be named Jesus, but clearly Abraham in Faith looked forward to see that God was bringing a redeemer to him, and how much more he knew would be a lengthy discussion. And I say that all forgiveness of sins that God has ever extended in any age was on the basis of the cross of Christ. I point to Romans for this. Rom 3:24-26 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. All past forgiveness was called due at the cross. So I boldly proclaim, while the OT saints did not have the clear revelation of Christ which we have today, they received forgiveness of sins through faith, and the forgiveness of their sins was purchased by the cross of Jesus Christ, and this not from some vague faith as in blindly trusting the good will of God, but faith in Jesus Christ the messiah as they trusted in promises from God for which Christ was the fulfillment and which was presented to them in past oracles of God through manifold means. And I deny entirely that this is the same as what the Jews do now in looking forward to some vague messiah that they imagine. For the pictures of Christ were only true in as much as they actually and truely pointed to Christ. Since Christ has now arrived there is nothing left in those old instituations, for regardless of whether their belief is sincere, the objects no longer truely point to any messiah to come because there is no messiah yet to come. For we are not judged or accepted on the sincerety of our faith, but the reliability of the object of our faith, Christ Jesus. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
78 | Have we been asleep? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 226936 | ||
Justme, I wouldn't disagree with what you are saying. But your post discussed none of those things. It did not conrast statements of the Q'uran with scripture, it didn't discuss verses used for witnesing with muslims, it didn't show how to scripturally or apologetically defend the faith. It wasn't the "deep bible study so one can defend their faith" you are saying you reccommend. Any of that would be wonderful. But rather it was just a vague post to watch out for muslims, with no actual question, left to sit on the unanswered question section. I do not mean to scold you, but that is simply outside the scope of what this forum is meant for, which is studying scripture, so I responded to bump it down. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
79 | How to treat non-believers? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 227047 | ||
Camellia, This would be my guess. The information you give is far to little for anything but a guess though. I wish I could answer with certainty. Rom 12:18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
80 | Satan has permission to rule | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 227481 | ||
PaulusSecundus, True true. However the question becomes, When is the thousand years? Many Christians today believe the only real question in end times belief is when will Christ come back in relation to the tribulation? At the beggining? At the end? In the middle? However, they would be suprised to know that in historical Christianity this has not been the question that divided where people stood. In contrast, the question was when will Christ come back in relation to this 1,000 year reign. To that there were three main answers. (I'm discounting the preterist view.) The one we are most familiar with would be the pre-millenial view. This view holds that Christ returns prior to the 1,000 year reign on earth. The second two both hold that the 1,000 year reign willhappen prior to Christs return. The first is postmillenial. This holds that the advance of the gospel will usher in a golden age for Christianity that lasts 1,000 years prior to Christs return. The final position is called amillenialism. It holds that Christs thousand year reign is meant to reference his current reigning on his throne in heaven guiding all things to their proper climax in his return. At the end of this time, satan will be released. This actually has been the most widely held stance historically, though few hold it now. Now, the scripture you referenced only actually impacts the discussion if you assume a premillenial view. I do not here intend to argue for one or the other, but only explain the assumptions we are bringing to the text. I'll tell you that I do not hold a premillenial view. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [26] >> |